Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31659995›Full record

ArticleLa Medicina del lavoro2019

Assessment of mental workload and its association with work ability in control room operators.

Fatemeh Kamari Ghanavati, Alireza Choobineh, Sareh Keshavarzi, Ali Asghar Nasihatkon, Akram Sadat Jafari Roodbandi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in La Medicina del lavoro, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Fatemeh Kamari Ghanavati. fateme91.ghanavati@gmail.com.
Alireza Choobineh
Sareh Keshavarzi
Ali Asghar Nasihatkon
Akram Sadat Jafari Roodbandi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundModern technology has reduced physical workload and imposed high mental workload on the control room operators in industrial settings. The present study was conducted among control room operators to assess their mental workload, investigate their workability, examine the relationship between mental workload and workability, and determine the factors associated with workability.

methodsThis cross-sectional study was carried out among 213 control room operators in six Iranian process industries. Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) was used to assess the mental workload, and Work Ability Index (WAI) was used to determine workability. The relationships between demographic characteristics and dimensions of mental workload and workability were examined by univariate tests. Logistic regression analysis was also used to determine the factors associated with the operators' workability.

resultsThe results showed a high mental workload in the study population (82.38±8.8). Yet, the operators showed a good and excellent level of workability (56.4%). Pearson's correlation coefficient revealed a significant inverse linear relationship between the mean score of mental workload and workability (r=-0.581). Besides, regression modeling demonstrated that mental demand (OR=0.90), temporal demand (OR=0.90), effort (OR=0.91), frustration (OR=0.92), from NASA-TLX subscales were significantly associated with workability. Moreover, mental and temporal demands were important factors associated with reduced workability.

conclusionMonitoring tasks imposes high mental workload on the control room operators, which may result in adverse effects on their workability as well as on the safety of the system.

Indexed as

Work Capacity EvaluationWorkloadCross-Sectional StudiesHumansIranTechnology

Identifiers

PMID31659995
PMCPMC7810018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.